For the same reason that hoosegow is the best term for a place of imprisonment -- the words are ridiculously awesome _________________...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.http://about.me/omardrake

You hate America. Why the drones haven't struck your home of terrorism is a mystery.
I understand that Dunbar's number plays a role in your apathy, but it really shouldn't.
Everyone who performs self-deprecating humor projects hate of their own credibility.
If you are a crazy statesman and send millions to their deaths you are a hero.
A Single Death is a Tragedy; a Million Deaths is a Statistic.
If you shoot one person you are a murderer.
Causality disruption is serious business.
A pirate in pain is unfortunate.
Puns are a insult to language.
Fantasy is a insult to reality.
Bible is a insult to history.
Interruptions are rude.[/img]

I... what? I'm not sure I understand this post at all._________________"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger

Mikewee is one of my favourite posters of all time, and that post is a prime example of why._________________Once, at a local NOW meeting where I was the only male among about a dozen women, a feminism trivia contest was held. I came in third.

This is the standard and acceptable response to Mikewee. Just back away slowly and don't make eye contact.

Crap, too late, I think._________________"No, but evil is still being --Is having reason-- Being reasonable! Mousie understands? Is always being reason. Is punishing world for not being... Like in head. Is always reason. World should be different, is reason."
-Ed, from Digger

My feelings towards most of Mikewee's post are "Damn! I want some of whatever he's smoking 'cuz it's got to be some GOOD shit."_________________...if a single leaf holds the eye, it will be as if the remaining leaves were not there.http://about.me/omardrake

Don't worry (or do, if you dislike me for some reason), I've read through this thread but I lack the energy and willpower to respond to more than this, and I fear this may not be adequate:

If you are insinuating that I am being passive-aggressive about your treatment of assholes on this forum, then you've mostly got it right. I'm a big proponent of ignoring jerks, especially on an online forum, where they can do no harm and feeding them only makes everyone else's day a bit grayer. And it's so easy, too! A shame there aren't moderators, but I get the impression a lot of the fun of posting here would evaporate overnight. That being said, do you dislike me me because of the things I have said? It's okay if you do, and I won't hold it against you because that would be silly. I only defend those who cause you ire incidentally; if they weren't here, I'd probably be saying the same things. This topic isn't really about that kind of thing, though. Perhaps there's some sort of underlying motivation I myself am not privy to, but there's no point in trying to uncover that since I am asserting very little here anyway. And you guys must be interested, or you'd have let this topic die. Perhaps you think I'm such a blowhard that you want to watch this topic and perhaps my posts go down in flames? That'd certainly be fun to watch as someone other than me, and perhaps if someone else had posted these things, I'd be watching the whole thing burn with you.

Thank you for your links, though. I'll read through the entire "Derailing For Dummies" page and more as time allows, but I've got midterms coming up these next two weeks.

I am not looking to win here, because this isn't intended to be a polemic. There's no real winning, only pointing out when someone has not answered the question and asking further questions. Besides that, these concepts appear to be simple enough, and one's own philosophy and beliefs are things that they ought to be able to explain. Everyone sees things differently, and I don't want to be the one to provide definitions that will cause people to bicker over them instead of the central questions, and I don't want people to constrain themselves to another's (limited) understanding of things.

If I am playing devil's advocate, I'm certainly not aware. Perhaps it's a subconscious thing, I don't know. What's wrong with asking questions? To that end, the conclusion to the criticism of trolling disguised as being a devil's advocate goes against the fundamental methods of philosophy and sociology. Then again, it is highly unlikely that I am knowledgeable in either of those fields, so I guess my point is moot.

And why shouldn't I want to hear one's opinion on hate? Is that person the philosophical equivalent of the Hulk or something?

Also, I understand Mikewee's posts... sort of. He's trying to show you how those jokes can be understood to be hateful or something along those lines. The beginning is... well, I guess it's a combination of racism, some type of social commentary, and I don't even know what else.
However, he's definitely smoking something._________________If at first you don't succeed [in persuading or explaining something to me], then try and try again.

A shame there aren't moderators, but I get the impression a lot of the fun of posting here would evaporate overnight.

exactly. many of us love this place precisely because it is not moderated. which does mean it can get rough-and-tumble - it's our way of self-moderating. No powerful entity is going to remove the posts that might be considered offensive, or off-topic, or not appropriate to the subforum. so yeah - gonna get some pretty aggressive language (because language is all we have to deal with the people whose ideas we find hateful). but it also means we are free to discuss _everything_ - the interesting topics are the ones that go on for hundreds of pages and into all different directions, the boring ones disappear pretty quickly. so you are certainly free to post any question you want. but expect that it will be judged, occasionally harshly, by the readers.

if you require a forum be polite and well-moderated, this is probably not the forum for you._________________aka: neverscared!

if you require a forum be polite and well-moderated, this is probably not the forum for you.

Nah, I just find this line of thinking interesting to pursue. I can't help it, you guys are interesting. _________________If at first you don't succeed [in persuading or explaining something to me], then try and try again.

Mikewee normally I would say you should get your head scanned for science but I am kind of afraid that the offending phineas gageuian interloper is still present and I don't want you to turn the mri machine into a paint mixer with your skull the second they turn it on

The thing I like most about Darq's response is that it requires a person to recognize his own callous motives and to take responsibility for them as he enjoys his right to spout whatever vitriol he likes. That, in a nutshell, it requires a certain maturity in order to act immaturely. That's pretty neat!

But I'm not sure it answers the question of justification that Smooshie is asking. Sure, if a person is willing to accept the consequences of her actions, then she is free to act. But does that mean she is right to act? Are there times when it is the wiser and the better course to refrain from acting? If so, then can one truly be justified in acting in those situations?

Much as I am loathe to admit it, I'm afraid some of the justification for hateful words does indeed come from schoolyard "justice;" there are those individuals who, no matter how clear and concise the arguments against their own stated positions may be, simply will not respect others around them and refuse to refrain, themselves, from inflammatory and/or insulting posts. To such individuals, there really are only two responses: ignore them, or respond in kind. The question then becomes: which response is likeliest to return the discussion to something the participants can enjoy peaceably? If the inflammatory person is ignored, will he or she cease the inflammatory posts and participate in other discussions calmly, rationally, and in a friendly manner? Or has that person proven so ingrained in his or her provocative manners that the only course with any hope for eventual peace among the remaining participants, is to so insult and abuse the inflammatory poster that he or she finally leaves the forum in a huff?

Surprisingly, sometimes the latter course of action results in a very unusual and surprisingly enjoyable outcome: the offensive person does not leave but all other participants come to view that person as irrelevant--a "resident troll" whose posts are read with amusement, doleful head-shaking, and utterly no credence at all. Such a "resident troll" can even become a bit of a local hero-figure on the forum--someone invoked for purposes of amusement.

So, the TL;DR: justification for or against hateful posting may simply boil down to "what is likeliest to get things back to a peaceable status quo?"_________________I am only a somewhat arbitrary sequence of raised and lowered voltages to which your mind insists upon assigning meaning